Quote:
Originally Posted by thorn69
Judges know that video can easily be tampered with and NO, it's not a "tell all" deal like you seem to think. There's a lot of factors that you can't see in videos. You'd know this if you had ever taken a photography class or went through a basic Police course or academy.
Then they played the video with the sound on and we heard EVERYTHING that was being said. The Officer had done his job and done his job well. 
Of course the family of the driver tried to sue because they felt that the Officer had shot and killed an unarmed man in the head. But the lawsuit was eventually dropped once the family was shown the videos. First they watched the convenience store robbery where their precious "do-no-wrong" angle was the one that had blown the head off the store clerk - a defenseless 19 year old school boy who was just trying to pay his way through community college. The family tried to decline watching the video of their "do-no-wrong" angel getting his head blown off by the Police Officer but were forced to watch it by the Defense attorney representing the Officer involved.
I was told that the mother cried her eyes out after watching it but went up and hugged the Officer that had shot her son and thanked him for doing his job and said something like after 21 years, she never really knew who her son was!
|
If you'd ever taken a photography class you'd know it is easy to tell when photos/video have been tampered with. Also if you'd ever actually been to a police course or academy, you'd know that cameras are your most powerful weapon for your defense or downfall. Cameras do not lie. Raw footage is not edited and it is easy for the experts to tell. When trying to argue against the power of the camera, why post about an event in which the camera saved the day?